DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination
A request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s RCE submission filed on 10/14/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
A reply was filed on 10/14/2025. The amendments to the drawings and claims have been entered. Claims 1-7, 10-16, and 19-24 are pending in the application with claims 1-7 withdrawn. Claims 10-16 and 19-24 are examined herein.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because it contains an embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code. Applicant is required to delete the embedded hyperlink and/or other form of browser-executable code; references to websites should be limited to the top-level domain name without any prefix such as http:// or other browser-executable code. See MPEP 608.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
Claims 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 22 recites “monitoring, by a sensor monitor module, a plurality of physical sensors configured to measure at least one of the first temperature, the second temperature, the third temperature, or the fourth temperature”. It is unclear if the “plurality of physical sensors” recited in claim 22 is intending to refer to one or both of the “first physical sensor” and “second physical sensor” previously recited in parent claim 10, or other sensors.
Claim 24 recites “receiving, by a communication module, sensor information from a sensor monitor module; and receiving, by a data server, the sensor information from the communication module”. It is unclear the relationship between the “sensor information” and “sensor monitor module” recited in claim 24 and the “first physical sensor” and “second physical sensor” previously recited in parent claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 10-16 and 19-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP Publication No. 2020-148769 (“Takeda”) in view of “Virtual Sensors” (“Martin”).
Regarding claim 10, Takeda (previously cited) (see FIGS. 1, 13-15) discloses a method for monitoring stored spent fuel rods (“spent fuel”) contained in a canister (4) ([0001], [0036]), the method comprising:
measuring, by a first physical sensor (e.g., 13A) at a first time, a first temperature (e.g., TB) of a first external surface (e.g., 4B) of a plurality of external surfaces (4B, 4T, 4S) of the canister ([0049], [0051], [0173]);
measuring, by a second physical sensor (e.g., 13B) at the first time, a second temperature (e.g., TT) at a second external surface (e.g., 4T) of the plurality of external surfaces of the canister ([0049], [0051], [0173]);
measuring, by the first physical sensor at a second time subsequent to the first time, a third temperature at the first external surface ([0049], [0051], [0063], [0069]);
measuring, by the second physical sensor at the second time, a fourth temperature at the second external surface ([0049], [0051], [0063], [0069]);
determining a first temperature difference (e.g., ΔTBT) between the second temperature and the first temperature ([0048], [0050], [0173]);
determining a second temperature difference between the third temperature and the fourth temperature ([0048], [0050], [0173]);
determining a value based on (1) a difference between the first temperature difference and the second temperature difference and (2) a difference between the second time and the first time ([0048], [0050], [0063], [0070], [0173]); and
automatically triggering an alarm, responsive to a determination that the value exceeds a threshold value ([0072]).
Takeda does not appear to disclose the value is determined using a virtual sensor as recited in claim 10. Martin (newly cited) (see FIG. 2) is similarly directed towards a method for monitoring a system (“asset”) using physical sensors (“physical sensors”, “PS”) (p. 315: “the condition of the physical world can either be ‘directly’ observed (by a physical sensor) or indirectly derived by fusing data from one or more physical sensors, i.e., applying virtual sensors”; p. 317: “An asset describes an object, subject, or system which, as a whole or in parts, is to be monitored or observed”). Martin teaches determining, using a virtual sensor (“virtual sensors”, “VS”) including a set of analytic functions determined by a computing simulation and temporal-spatial temperature data, a virtual sensor value (“virtual sensor data”) based on sensor information from the physical sensors (p. 315: “the condition of the physical world can either be ‘directly’ observed (by a physical sensor) or indirectly derived by fusing data from one or more physical sensors, i.e., applying virtual sensors”; p. 317: more complex, but still simple fusion functions apply methods such as scaling, filtering, linearization, aggregation, extrapolation and others to the source data in order to provide a final measurement result”; pp. 317-318: “machine learning-based functions are applicable, which are able to infer a target of interest from data sources of different resolution, availability, type and form”; p. 318: “The derived measurements produced by a data fusion function represent the virtual sensor data”, “virtual sensors can serve both as data sources for digital twins as well as their integrators, since a digital twin is also an integral part of the virtual sensor concept”). Martin further teaches the virtual sensor technique provides the advantages of more precise measurements, reducing signal noise, and increasing reliability (p. 317: “fusion enables both more precise measurements of one specific phenomenon (e.g., temperature at a specific location within a system)”; pp. 318-319: “overall accuracy may increase, and at the same time uncertainty as well as transmission volume is reduced.... Multiple sensors providing redundant information can also increase reliability in the event of a sensor failure or malfunction.... Furthermore, the influence of drifts caused by sensor accuracy can be detected and optionally corrected”). It would have therefore been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date (“POSA”) to employ Martin’s virtual sensor technique in Takeda’s method for the benefits thereof. Thus, modification of Takeda in order to enhance precision and reliability, as suggested by Martin, would have been obvious to a POSA.
Regarding claim 11, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda does not appear to disclose a specific value of the predetermined threshold value. However, it would have been obvious to a POSA to have predetermined threshold value that is two degrees Celsius since it has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum or workable range involves only routine skill in the art. Takeda explicitly discloses the predetermined threshold value may be determined via simulations ([0047]).
Regarding claims 12 and 15, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses the first external surface is located at a first superior end (4B) of the canister and the second external surface is located at an inferior end (4T) of the canister (FIGS. 1-2, 13-15, [0048]).
Regarding claim 13, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses determining, responsive to the determination that the virtual sensor value exceeds the threshold value, an indication of a chemical change of the spent fuel rods, the chemical change comprising an increase in gaseous moiety and air mixture concentrations ([0052]-[0054], [0056]).
Regarding claim 14, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 13. Takeda discloses the moiety is an element selected from the group consisting of helium, krypton, xenon, hydrogen, nitrogen, argon and combinations thereof ([0052]-[0054]).
Regarding claim 16, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses reviewing a database correlating change in temperature differences with an algorithm-derived time line ([0046], [0067]).
Regarding claim 19, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses determining, responsive to the determination that the virtual sensor value exceeds the threshold value, an indication of a pressure decrease inside the canister (FIG. 22, [0052], [0057], [0066], [0073], [0153]-[0154], [0163]).
Regarding claim 20, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses determining, responsive to the determination that the virtual sensor value exceeds the threshold value, that the stored spent fuel rods are damaged ([0063], [0172]-[0173]).
Regarding claim 21, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses the canister is oriented vertically and a height of the canister is greater than a width of the canister (FIG. 1, [0033], [0139]).
Regarding claim 22, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses monitoring, by a sensor monitor module (18), a plurality of physical sensors (13A, 13B, 13C, 13E) configured to measure at least one of the first temperature, the second temperature, the third temperature, or the fourth temperature (FIG. 3, [0050], [0068]-[0069]).
Regarding claim 23, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses the difference between the second time and the first time is 60 seconds (FIGS. 13-15).
Regarding claim 24, Takeda in view of Martin teaches the method as recited in claim 10. Takeda discloses receiving, by a communication module (16a), sensor information from a sensor monitor module (18) and receiving, by a data server (17), the sensor information from the communication module (FIG. 3, [0068]-[0069]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the prior drawing objections and 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejections.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the prior 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections, but have created new issues as discussed above.
Applicant’s arguments directed towards the prior art rejections have been fully considered, but are directed towards newly added and/or amended claim language and are therefore addressed in the rejections above.
The Applied References
For Applicant’s benefit, portions of the applied reference(s) have been cited (as examples) to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection, it is noted that the prior art must be considered in its entirety by Applicant, including any disclosures that may teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02(VI).
Interview Information
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Contact Information
Examiner Jinney Kil can be reached at (571) 272-3191, on Monday-Thursday from 8:30AM-6:30PM ET. Supervisor Jack Keith (SPE) can be reached at (571) 272-6878.
/JINNEY KIL/Examiner, Art Unit 3646